Call to widen evacuation area around Fukushima

Our team of radiation specialists in Japan brought back their findings for the day.

The press release says it all:

Fukushima, March 27, 2011: Greenpeace radiation experts have confirmed radiation levels of up to ten micro Sieverts per hour in Iitate village, 40km northwest of the crisis-stricken Fukushima/Daiichi nuclear plant, and 20km beyond the official evacuation zone. These levels are high enough to require evacuation.

“It is clearly not safe for people to remain in Iitate, especially children and pregnant women, when it could mean receiving the maximum allowed annual dose of radiation in only a few days. When further contamination from possible ingestion or inhalation of radioactive particles is factored in, the risks are even higher.”

Post a comment

OPTIONAL: Sign in now and avoid filling in forms! Not registered?
Sign up here
or login via facebook or google.

(Unregistered) shawn
says:

I am glad to finally hear independent assesments of the situation as we know governments & corporations have their own agendas & believe that...

I am glad to finally hear independent assesments of the situation as we know governments & corporations have their own agendas & believe that we are not intelligent enough to make our own minds up,,,but the world is awakening to their madness so keep up the good work & thank U

Post a comment

OPTIONAL: Sign in now and avoid filling in forms! Not registered?
Sign up here
or login via facebook or google.

(Unregistered) biologist
says:

I was appallaed at first by this article and sent mails to swedish media about it. But you talk about MICRO sievertz here, not MILLI Sievertz. Am I co...

I was appallaed at first by this article and sent mails to swedish media about it. But you talk about MICRO sievertz here, not MILLI Sievertz. Am I correct that 1 milliSievertz is 1/1000 Sievert and that one microSievert is 1/1000 000 Sievertz?
10 microS would mean 0,01 millS per hour if my math is not completely wrong. (10/1000). A converter on Internet said 0,1 mS, though, so I can be wrong there. Anyway:

The annual maximum dose for nuclear plant worker in Sweden is 50 milli Sievertz. In Japan it is 250 mS.
So how can this mean people in the area will reach the maximum yearly dose in a few days?
Don´t misunderstand me, I am following the nuclear accident hour by hour and is very concerned.

Post a comment

To post a comment you need to be signed in.

OPTIONAL: Sign in now and avoid filling in forms! Not registered?
Sign up here
or login via facebook or google.

(Unregistered) Woolly
says:

One millisievert (1 msv) = One thousand microsieverts (1,000 usv). Greenpeace's reading was reported as 10 micro sieverts per hour (10 usv/h). In 24 hours, a resident would be exposed to 240 usv. In 10 days, a resident would be exposed to 2,400 usv which is 2.4 msv. As a comparison, a north american is typically exposed to 4.0 msv in an entire year. Of this 4.0 msv, a portion (3.0 msv) is normal background radiation. The remaining 1.0 msv is considered the annual maximum for other "voluntary" radiation such as x-rays, etc. It is true that for radiogoly technicians, the annual maximum of 1.0 msv is increaed to 50 msv. And for emergencies, nuclear plant personnel have a limit of 100 msv per year. With readings of 10 usv/h, they should be evacuated.

@ Wooly: Yes, internationally recommended maximum dose of ionizing radiation from artificial sources, for members of public, is 1 mSv (milliSievert) per year. With the dose rate of 10 microSievert, you reach 1 mSv in 100 hours = 4 days. Note that this is only external gamma radiation dose rate, those people are explosed to internal contamination as well, by breathing air with dust, eating food, drinking water, all containing increased levels of radioisotopes from Fukushima. So the real, combined dose they receive could be up to several times higher.

We need to be also aware that even the 1 mSv, as maximum annual dose, does not guarantee it is safe! Especially with large numbers of populations are exposed to it, even if within this limit, there will be some health impacts and even fatalities. The risk factor, given by ICRP (International Commission for Radiological Protection) is 5 % per 1 Sv of accumulated dose, and agrees on linear, non-threshold theory. Thus, if 10 million Japanese people receive 1 mSv of additional dose, you can expect 500 fatalities.

Post a comment

OPTIONAL: Sign in now and avoid filling in forms! Not registered?
Sign up here
or login via facebook or google.

(Unregistered) Michael
says:

Can you post the actual data (time, weather, device that took the reading) with location data. Without that the google maps data is useless for compar...

Can you post the actual data (time, weather, device that took the reading) with location data. Without that the google maps data is useless for comparison with government data. Also you should be measuring in the same place as the government sensors to make sure they are reporting real numbers.

Post a comment

OPTIONAL: Sign in now and avoid filling in forms! Not registered?
Sign up here
or login via facebook or google.

(Unregistered) Scientist
says:

Why are you not taking any measurements of the Pacific Ocean in various places (Do you not have ships)? More importantly, why are you not measuring le...

Why are you not taking any measurements of the Pacific Ocean in various places (Do you not have ships)? More importantly, why are you not measuring levels of Strontium 90, Plutonium 239, Caesium 137, etc...? (I.e. the radio nuclides that contaminate the environment for the next 30 - 24000 years)

It's not the immediate radiation exposure we should be worried about, it's the long term (chronic) exposure to an increased "low" level of radiation. Regular ingestion of relatively low level radioactive waste is by far more dangerous (inhalation as well as eating / drinking through contaminated food and water supply). Perhaps of interest is this scientific review on cancer rate following Chernobyl. http://carcin.oxfordjournals.org/content/30/11/1821.full.pdf+html

Note that there are many diseases related to long term exposure of Ionising Radiation, including various genetic disorders in future generations, it's not just cancer...For people that process information better through visual stimulation, the following site might be of interest http://inmotion.magnumphotos.com/essay/chernobyl